Review: THE SECRET OF PEMBROOKE PARK by Julie Klassen

I received a copy of this book via Netgalley for the purposes of this review.

After a bad investment, the Fosters find themselves looking to downsize with a small home in the country. But they can't find a property that's both affordable and large enough for the entire family, until a lawyer appears offering them the lease of a large estate called Pembrooke Park ("With two o's"), for an amount they can't refuse. Yet questions surround the property, such as: Who is leasing it to them? Why was it abandoned twenty years ago? And are the rumors of murder and hidden treasure true?

I decided to read The Secret of Pembrooke Park for several reasons: one, I know a few people who love Julie Klassen's books, and I've been meaning to try them for a while. And two, it was pitched to me as inspired by Northanger Abbey. Because of that, I feel like The Secret of Pembrooke Park invites comparisons to Northanger Abbey; unfortunately it doesn't fare very favorably in that comparison. If you're looking for something fun and romantic along the lines of Northanger, you're going to be disappointed. Unfortunately, if you're looking for something along the lines of a traditional Gothic romance with Pembrooke, I feel like you're also going to be disappointed.

Although there are definitely parts of The Secret of Pembrooke Park that feel very Northanger Abbey-ish–specifically William Chapman, the handsome and charming (though of course not as charming as Henry Tilney; that would be impossible) local curate–The Secret of Pembrooke Park is fundamentally different in execution and tone from Northanger Abbey for the very fact that it takes itself about 200% more seriously than Northanger Abbey does. Northanger Abbey was a parody of the Gothic genre; Pembrooke Park is not. There's very little humor or self-awareness of how the story operates as a Gothic novel in these pages. There's a lot of Gothic-y stuff going on, definitely, but none of it really comes together. Just a few plot elements off the top of my head:

• Creepy doll house with decapitated dolls lying around. Good start, but the doll thing is quickly abandoned and forgotten about.
• Missing portrait of the mistress of the house.
• Hidden treasure.
• Pool of blood found on the night the family abandoned the mansion.
• Secret room.
• Stolen brooches?
• Long-lost Pembrookes returning.
• Unknown figure in a hooded green cloak wandering about. Is it the ghost of Clive Pembrooke?! Is Clive Pembrooke the guy who owned the house before the Fosters moved in, or was that the other Pembrooke everyone keeps talking about? And why do we care about that guy? Confusing.
• Random journal entries mailed to Abigail for no apparent reason.
• Coded messages.
• A grumpy caretaker who clearly knows more than he's admitting.
• A lazy and suspicious manservant.
• A slutty sister bringing shame to the family name.
• Lost heiresses.
• Missing family bible.

It's a lot to take in. I wouldn't have minded if it was all to a purpose, but it felt more like Klassen was making it up as she went along, throwing a bunch "spooky" stuff out there in the hopes it would stick, without considering how to make the most of the strongest elements. Catherine's suspicion of General Tilney when she first arrived at Northanger Abbey was more chilling than all of the stuff in this book combined, and she made all of it up in her own head!

As for the love story, I was not into it. It's kind of hard to feel invested in a relationship arc when there are three men chasing after the heroine and, as far as I can tell, they are interchangeable to her. It was impossible to tell what Abigail's feelings for the guys were, beyond "a flutter of attraction." Whenever any of them came on to her, she just kind of stood there and passively accepted what they did to her, no matter who it was. I would have liked for her to demonstrate some feeling or personal preference, by perhaps throwing herself at William, but she never did. It was very frustrating.

In fact, as the book went on I grew more and more annoyed with Abigail in general. We're TOLD she's practical and knows her own mind, but her behavior doesn't really bear that out. Actually, her behavior doesn't bear much of anything out–I've encountered ghosts in literature with more personality. She's devoid of any goals or personal motivation, and feelings...? Hard to say. By the time I finished The Secret of Pembrooke Park, I found myself convinced a cup of weak tea would have been as interesting a heroine as Abigail.

I will say Klassen's writing style is charming, and that was enough to keep me engaged for the first half of the book. But no writing style is enough to make me overlook the last twenty percent of The Secret of Pembrooke Park, where instead of letting the numerous plot points that went nowhere just hang there, each and every single one is laboriously explained through an endless series of expositional monologues. I'd rather be left to wonder–and that's another frustrating thing about The Secret of Pembrooke Park. There are moments when a genuine mystery or something of interest pops up (William snooping on his tour of the house, for example), but these elements are either immediately revealed as harmless (William was just curious) or dropped in favor of something else. Klassen shines when writing about everyday society–balls, going to church, Abigail's sister's behavior in London–but when it comes to building a sense of mystery, not so much.

Basically, I enjoyed the first part of The Secret of Pembrooke Park, but by the end I was more than a little annoyed. If you would like to give the book a try yourself, however, there's a tour-wide giveaway! Three lucky winners will receive one trade paperback or eBook copy of The Secret of Pembrooke Park, and one grand prize winner will receive one copy of all eight of Julie’s novels: Lady of Milkweed Manor, The Apothecary's Daughter, The Silent Governess, The Girl in the Gatehouse, The Maid of Fairbourne Hall, The Tutor’s Daughter, The Dancing Master, and The Secret of Pembrooke Park, one DVD of Northanger Abbey (2007 [love this production]) and a Jane Austen Action Figure.

To enter the giveaway contest, simply leave a comment on any or all of the blog stops on The Secret of Pembrooke Park Blog Tour starting February 16, 2015 through 11:59 pm PT, March 9, 2015. Winners will be drawn at random from all of the comments and announced on Julie Klassen’s website on March 16, 2015. Winners have until March 22, 2015 to claim their prize. The giveaway contest is open to residents of the US, UK, and Canada. Digital books will be sent through Amazon or Barnes & Noble. Good luck to all!

And here's a list of the other blog stops. I'm sure most of these readers liked The Secret of Pembrooke Park better than I did, so don't hesitate to check out their reviews if you'd like some second opinions:

• February 16 My Jane Austen Book Club (Guest Blog)
• February 16 vvb32 Reads (Excerpt)
• February 17 Psychotic State Book Reviews (Review)
• February 17 My Kids Led Me Back to Pride and Prejudice (Spotlight)
• February 18 Addicted to Jane Austen (Review)
• February 18 Peeking Between the Pages (Review)
• February 19 Jane Austen in Vermont (Interview)
• February 19 Living Read Girl (Review) 
• February 20 My Love for Jane Austen (Excerpt)
• February 20 Truth, Beauty, Freedom & Books (Review)
• February 20 Laura's Reviews (Guest Blog)
• February 21 A Bookish Way of Life (Review)
• February 21 Confessions of a Book Addict (Review)
• February 21 Romantic Historical Reviews (Excerpt)
• February 22 Reflections of a Book Addict (Review)
• February 23 Austenesque Reviews (Guest Blog)
• February 23 Peace, Love, Books (Review)
• February 24 vvb32 Reads (Review)
• February 24 Poof Books (Excerpt)
• February 25 Babblings of a Bookworm (Review)
• February 25 Austenesque Reviews (Review)
• February 25 Luxury Reading (Review)
• February 26 So Little Time…So Much to Read (Review) 
• February 26 More Agreeably Engaged (Excerpt)
• February 27 Psychotic State Book Reviews (Interview)
• February 27 Booktalk & More (Review)
• February 28 Laughing with Lizzie (Spotlight)
• February 28 The Calico Critic (Review)
• March 01 Leatherbound Reviews (Excerpt)
• March 01 Delighted Reader (Review)
• March 02 CozyNookBks (Review)
• March 02 Laura's Reviews (Review)

Thanks to Laurel Ann and Bethany House for inviting me to be part of the blog tour!



Discus this post with me on Twitter, FaceBook, Google+ or in the comments below.

Disqualifications for Being Agreeable (According to Jane Austen)

See more on Know Your Meme

In Sense and Sensibility, Jane Austen enumerates the many ways by which a person can lose Elinor Dashwood's approval. I know you're thinking breathing has got to be on the list, but no! Her standards are slightly higher than that. To be specific, people are not good company if they have:

• Want of sense, either natural or improved [why would someone without sense improve their sense?]
• Want of elegance
• Want of spirits [I hope this refers to spirits of the liquor variety]
• Want of temper

As an illustrative example, we're told that after a dinner party, the women in the group get into a long conversation about who is taller, Harry Dashwood or Lady Middleton's son, William. Mmkay. Not to be disagreeable or anything, but if you want to talk about something more interesting, Elinor, you can bring up a topic yourself. You don't have to listen to that cow Fanny talk. Maybe Sense and Sensibility should be retitled How to Be Agreeable While Screaming on the Inside.

In any event, I thought it would be appropriate to list my own disqualifications for being agreeable, should I ever find myself in Elinor's company.

• Hungry. I am not in a good mood when I'm hungry.
• I wanted to write that day, but for some reason I didn't, or what I did write was crap. This will make me VERY disagreeable.
• It was too cold to go outside. Grrr.
• Too much pressure.
• There was a want of coffee. HULKSMASH

Apparently I have a want of temper. But on the plus side I do have lots of spirits.


What do you guys think of Elinor's disqualifications for being agreeable? And why do we have to be agreeable, anyway?

Austentatious Bad Boys

Consider yourself smirked. Among other things.

Alfred Hitchcock once said "The more successful the villain, the more successful the picture," an axiom that is equally true for many books. Jane Austen, on the other hand, never really had any Hitchcockian-style villains in her novels; but she did write several bad boy characters who make the books they're in that much better.



Personally, my two favorites are Wickham and Willoughby. If you're a fan of bad boys, Wickham has many laudable qualities: one, he's an officer. That means he wears a fancy uniform (hot), he's automatically dashing, and he moves around a lot--the perfect answer to any woman's escapist fantasies. He's also super-smirky, and as we all know from reading Fifty Shades of Grey, women can't resist The Smirk. Oh no. If only he'd stop running off with teenage girls and plying them with his wicked ways.


Is it hot in here suddenly? *fans self*

Right now I'm reading Sense & Sensibility for Reading with Analysis' Jane Austen January, and I have to say that I LOVE Willoughby. Unlike Wickham, Willoughby is über-romantic, like Heathcliff come to life! Who would blame Marianne for falling for his I'm-so-into-you schtick? Not me. His OKCupid profile probably reads, "I like long walks, collecting locks of your hair, and I'll write you a song." I'd be all over that. I bet he even quotes poetry. *swoon*

Even his name sounds romantic, like a sigh of longing echoing across the moors. "Willoughby! Caw, caw!" Honestly, the fact that he's a playa playa doesn't really cut down on the appeal that much. I mean, is he really that different from the sainted Edward, other than the fact that Edward is not at all charming or interesting? They both snatch locks of hair, mislead the Dashwood sisters, form secret engagements, cause a scandal, and lose all their money. Taken from that perspective, Willoughby is really the better bet. Right? Right, guys?


Who's your favorite Austen bad boy?

Guest Review: PERSUADE ME by Juliet Archer

Today we have a guest review from blogger and author Margay Leah Justice. The novel, Persuade Me, is an adaptation of Jane Austen's Persuasion and sounds quite excellent. Welcome, Margay!


I consider myself a romantic at heart. I like to watch romantic comedies, I get sappy at Happily Ever Afters, and I re-read tried and true romances to remind myself that they do exist – if only in the pages of beloved books. So it’s no surprise that I have a special affinity for Jane Austen. I love her stories, her affinity for recording the foibles of humans who dance the dance of love – and the idiosyncrasies of all the secondary players who make the heroes and heroines what they are. My one problem with Miss Austen is that she didn’t write enough stories! I feel like her main six are just a teaser – but oh, what a tease! So, to fill in the empty spaces left behind by what could have been had she written more, I like to read adaptations of her stories.

In my quest to get more of Jane Austen and the wonderful characters and worlds she created, I read just about every adaptation I can get my hands on. Some have been good, some not so much. But there’s a rare few that take my breath away and make me want to read them again. One of those stories is Persuade Me by Juliet Archer.

Persuade Me is a modern retelling of Persuasion and it has just enough quirks to make it original. The main characters, Anna and Rick, met and fell in love in France, but she, on the advice of an old family friend, broke it off, convinced it was a poor match, and then was whisked back to England by a father who can hardly bear the sight of her. Flash forward some years later and Anna has developed into a self-assured woman with a degree in Russian Literature and Rick is a marine biologist living in Australian who is making a splash in the world of literature having written a book with a somewhat provocative title. During his book tour – which inevitably leads him back to England – Rick crosses paths with Anna once again and the adventure begins.

I have to admit that Persuasion is one of my favorite Austen stories, so I was excited to read an adaptation of it. I don’t think it receives the attention Pride and Prejudice does, but it deserves it. This is such a classic story of lost love and second chances, ripe with likable characters and despicable ones and it translates well to modern times. In Ms. Archer’s hands, the story shines, taking on its own relevance and leading the reader by the hand through the story to the inevitable conclusion in such a way that, if one hadn’t read – or was even aware of – the original piece, it wouldn’t matter. They would still be enthralled by this story. Indeed after reading it, one might be encouraged to read the original to see how it compares.

I must admit that, sometimes, I’m hesitant to read adaptations because I’m afraid they won’t measure up to the original, but Persuade Me does not disappoint. It hits all the key points – the love story between Anna and Rick, the influence of the family friend, the despicable natures of Anna’s father and older sister, and the clingy, whiney nature of her younger sister – in the original, but does it in a way that makes it seem fresh. The idea of Rick being a biologist and writer rather than a captain is a stroke of genius. Anna being more self-reliant and not so much under the thumb of her family is a welcome relief. The book tour is a brilliant way to get all of the other key elements together and make it the author’s own. I had so much fun reading this book, I can’t wait to read it again. But first, I want to check out the first book in the Darcy and Friends series, The Importance of Being Emma.

Final verdict: Extremely enjoyable and I would recommend it to any Austen fan and anyone who just loves a darn good story.

A little more about it (from the author’s website):

Boy meets girl, falls in love and asks her to sail round the world with him. Girl loves boy - but listens to The Voice of Reason, an old family friend, and says no…

The words ‘forgive and forget’ are not in Rick Wentworth’s vocabulary. The word ‘regret’ is definitely in Anna Elliot’s.

When they meet again ten years later, he seems indifferent and intent on finding happiness elsewhere. Can she convince him that their lost love is worth a second chance?

Persuade Me, JA’s modern version of Persuasion, will be available in September 2011. In the meantime, you can read the prologue and first chapter here or feast your eyes on a certain Captain Wentworth.

JA says: Just as I felt Knightley needed updating for a 21st-century audience  in The Importance of Being Emma, I’ve given Anne Elliot similar treatment in Persuade Me. My Anna leads her own life and is financially independent of her father, although there’s enough baggage between them to fill an airport carousel! I’d love to know what you think of the extract - email me at juliet@julietarcher.com.

Thank you, Margay! That sounds like a great book.
Margay Leah Justice is the author of Sloane Wolf, available at museituppublishing.com. You can also find her on FaceBook, Moonlight, Lace and Mayhem, Twitter, MySpace, and the Jane Austen Society Pages.

Janeite Gift Guide!

I've been noticing these 'gift guides' popping up everywhere, and since I don't like recommending books to get people I don't know (it's hard enough figuring out books to get people I do know), I thought I would instead share with you these delightful Janeite items you can buy on Etsy.



Jane Austen bookmarks by CastleontheHill--$9.50 for 6

Aren't these adorable? The seller also has art prints with these original drawings of Jane Austen characters. I think this would be cute gift for a pre-teen just starting to read classics.



Jane Austen inspired corner bookmarks by FairestLJ--$10 for 2

These corner bookmarks are much fancier (and more expensive) than the previous bookmarks. Not sure how practical they are, either, but they certainly look good.



My Other Ride is a Barouche decal sticker by eaton--$3 for 1

Cars and Regency-era romance so rarely go together, but they can now with this perfect accessory for every driving Janeite!



Mr. Darcy Note Cards by ecdesign--$14 for 10

Probably not the best card to use for an apology, but they would be awesome to send in lieu of a break-up text.



Mr. Darcy Holiday Card by bbInvitations--$5 for 1

Haha. Kidding! But kinda not.



Mr. Darcy Proposal Scarf by Brookish--$24 for 1

You'll not only think but feel like Mr. Darcy in this snowy white women's cravat, which repeats the classic words of his proposal, right before he put his foot in his mouth.



Mr. Darcy ring by CandleBrightCreation--$16 for 1

Mr. Darcy is literally wrapped around your finger.



Pride & Prejudice locations typography t-shirt by Brookish--$22 for 1

Okay, this I really do need. Listing all the locations mentioned in P&P, this shirt is a subtle and clever way of identifying other Janeites, and may also double as a map in case you get lost. In Regency England.


Do you have any great gift ideas for lovers of Jane Austen novels?

What Would Jane Austen Do?

Maybe I'm more of a Janeite than I realized, because whenever something in modern literature starts to annoy me, I ask myself, "What if Jane Austen were living today? How would [insert annoying trend here] affect her books?"

Take series, for example. It's getting out of control, people! Do stand-alone books even exist anymore?! Is there any reason beyond trying to make me buy more books that you've decided to stretch out this story over fourteen 500-page volumes? I think we both know there isn't.

As I was telling Colette from A Buckeye Girl Reads the other night, if Pride & Prejudice was written today, it'd be a 10-book series and would go something like this:

• Book one, Darcy and Lizzie don't like each other, then fall in love.
• Book two, Georgiana's volume! She falls in love with the broody next door neighbor she's never liked. There's sex in this one because some people complained.
• Book three, Kitty's volume! She falls in love with an officer who rubs her the wrong way at the outset--until he rubs her right. heh
• Book four, Colonel Fitzwilliam! He's always been sweet on a girl he knows in London, even though she hates him.
• Book five, Mary's volume! She meets a roguish rake that she heartily disapproves of, and vice versa; but after his friends bet him that he can't convince Mary to "dance" with him, roguish rake sets out to woo her and falls in love after she gets a make-over.
• Book six, the return of Wacky Wickham! After therapy, Wickham decides to stop drinking and joins the Quakers, where he falls in love with a virginal miss who instantly dislikes him. Fortunately Lydia has fallen into the pit of convenient plot devices.
• Book seven, Caroline Bingly! Will her pride prevent her from seeing that a man below her station is in love with her? Or more to the point, will it stop her from caring?
• Book eight, we're running out of characters! Miss Anne de Bourgh! She meets someone her mother really likes but she doesn't! But then it turns out he's not that bad after all! And he's the first person she's ever had an opinion about.
• Book nine, Charlotte! Mr. Collins kicks the bucket by walking into a tree in Rosings Park and Charlotte runs away with a smuggler! Whom she doesn't like, until they have sex.
• Book ten, there has to be some character left to hook up. Oh, hey, Mrs. Philips! She decides to travel the world and marries an Italian whom she at first didn't like. Lucky they both speak the language of looove.

In case you didn't notice, these are all basically the same book! And just think, if Jane Austen had spent her time rewriting P&P in these progressively more terrible books, then she never would have written Emma, or Mansfield Park, or Persuasion. Her entire legacy would be ONE great novel and a bunch of sad-going-on-pathetic imitations. Yes, the one great novel is enough, but how many series today have one great book in them?

Out of curiosity, are there any other characters we want to hook up from P&P?

Disgust & Desire, Pride & Prejudice

A few days ago, Jessica from Read React Review had a great post on the philosophy of sexual desire.  In one part of the post, she talks about how sexual desire is dependent upon revulsion and disgust.  To share a quote Jessica had in her post:

[S]exual desire depends on the idea of a prohibited domain of the disgusting. A person’s tongue in your mouth could be experienced as a pleasure or as a most repulsive and nauseating intrusion depending on the state of relations that exist or are being negotiated between you and the person. But someone else’s tongue in your mouth can be a sign of intimacy because it can also be a disgusting assault.¹

As Jessica pointed out, you see this played out metaphorically a lot in romance novels.  But I would say it's really exemplified best in Pride & Prejudice, which is arguably the source for at least half of the romantic fiction plots ever written.  I'm not referring only to Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy--their initial dislike for one another that eventually turns into admiration and (spoiler alert! Seriously, will you read the book already?) love has become a trope of literary romances--that's obvious.  But take, for example, Mr. and Mrs. Bennett.  Mr. Bennett supposedly can't stand his wife, yet he somehow managed to father five children with her?  HMM.  Or Charlotte and Mr. Collins, who seem to develop a relationship of mutual disgust fairly quickly.  Or do they?  Certainly Charlotte is attracted to Collins for the freedom from her parents he represents, if nothing else.  Happiness in marriage may be entirely a matter of chance, as Charlotte proclaimed, but the major sexual relationships in the book appear to rely on a balance of attraction and repulsion, both on the part of the characters and the reader's impression of them.

Interestingly, I don't believe this dichotomy is present in Austen's other novels, definitely not to the degree of Pride & Prejudice.  Marianne may eventually become disgusted with Willoughby, but they don't wind up together.  Neither Elinor from Sense and Sensibility, or Anne from Persuasion, or Emma Woodhouse ever seem to work up more than annoyance for their various romantic other halfs.

Is the push-and-pull of revulsion and attraction what makes Pride & Prejudice Austen's most famous novel?  I do think that it helps make the relationships seem more "real" to the reader.  It's really surprising to me (though I don't know why) that Austen was able to intuit that dynamic and integrate it so seamlessly into the plot of her novel.

Can you think of any other Austen relationships that have a digust/desire component?  Are there any writers who can beat Austen at her own game?

¹William Ian Miller, An Anatomy of Disgust (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1997), p.137.

The Lost Memoirs of Jane Austen by Syrie James

The fact that Jane Austen never married apparently bothers a lot of people.  How could a woman who wrote about love so perceptively, who is still making readers fall in love with her characters centuries after the fact, have never loved herself?  But more importantly, if Jane Austen never loved, that means her novels were total fantasy.  We don't want to believe they are fantasy; we want to believe they were based in truth, and our own Mr. Darcy or Elizabeth Bennett (depending on your preferences) really is out there. 

This seems to be the impetus behind several retellings of Austen's life, including the movie Becoming Jane, which I only wish I could forget!  The Lost Memoirs of Jane Austen is very similar to Becoming Jane, unfortunately--not because it proposes that Tom Lefroy was Austen's true lost love, but in the way it completely white-washes Jane Austen herself and presents a very unconvincing and really rather lame romance.

I had high hopes for this book at the beginning.  The language is very Austen-esque and the author has clearly done her research on Jane Austen's life.  It starts off with Jane having to move from her life-long home in Hertfordshire to Bath with her parents.  Then her father dies, so she and her sister and her mother have to move again and rely on the charity of her family.  Eventually, she meets Mr. Ashford, who is a future baronet and very nice, and who likes to read novels!  And not just any novels, but the same girly novels Jane likes reading.  HOW WEIRD.

This book is very odd, because it seems to assume the reader knows nothing about Jane Austen or her books.  To give it an air of "authenticity," there are scholarly footnotes along the lines of, "Jane's near tumble from these steps... may have inspired Louisa Musgrove's treacherous fall from the Cobb in Jane Austen's Persuasion," or, "Jane Austen included an almost identical speech in Mansfield Park...".  No kidding!  I figured that out all on my own, and I haven't even read Mansfield Park.  Also, being passingly familiar with the Regency era through romance novels, I do know what a reticule and landau are and don't need to be told about it in the footnotes, thanks.

Even when not pointing them out with insipid footnoting, there are numerous other references here to Austen's novels.  In fact, there isn't a single character or scene in this book that doesn't come out of an Austen novel.  At one point Austen writes, "Little did I know that I was to meet Mr. Ashford again, and soon, in the most unexpected of circumstances."  I found myself thinking, "This is a Regency novel, honey; there are only so many ways for you two to meet!" (And in case you were wondering, yes, it was at a dinner party.)

I'm not against either faux scholarly footnotes or borrowing scenes and characters straight out of other books.  I really enjoyed the footnotes in Little Vampire Women, for example, and I loved how characters from Pride & Prejudice were used in Lost In Austen.  In both of those cases, however, the authors were very creative in the way they adapted the original writings to a new storyline.  It's not enough to just mash together the characters and plot--you have to put your own spin on it, or else what's the point of anyone reading it?  With Lost Memoirs, the way James referenced other Austen books was so literal there were absolutely zero surprises in the novel.

As for the character of Jane Austen herself, I have the same criticism of her in this book that I did in Becoming Jane:  she's not snarky enough to be Jane Austen.  Austen wasn't only smart, she was sharp as a knife: she could assess a person's character and then cut them to pieces at ten paces.  The only thing that kept her from doing so was a sympathy for human foibles.  "For what do we live, but to make sport for our neighbors, and laugh at them in our turn?" as Mr. Bennett says.  Austen was fascinated by people and what made them tick; she understood their silly eccentricities even as she made fun of them.  I didn't see any of that fascination or wit in this book.  There is one scene where Jane Austen tries to be clever, but it is reheheheally lame.

Finally, the romance is so stupid as to be incidental, and did not help to further the cause of true love, to say the least.  Ashford is very much like Edward from Sense and Sensibility, only more boring (if that is possible).  It's impossible to buy into him as a real character, and the conclusion of their "romance" left me cold.  If that is what we're supposed to believe Austen experienced in the romance department, then she truly did draw on her imagination for her love stories!

As you've probably guessed, I do not recommend this book.  If you don't know a single solitary thing about Jane Austen or her books, you might be surprised by this novel--but then why would you pick this book up?  The cover, however, is very pretty.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Mr. Darcy Broke My Heart by Beth Pattillo

This is a charming, if not groundbreaking, chick-lit novel that uses Pride & Prejudice as its inspiration.  It's more creative than your average Austen adaptation, and overall a very enjoyable read; but I found the ending annoying.

Claire, a member of the recently unemployed, travels to Oxford for a Jane Austen conference in her pregnant sister's stead.  One would expect an Austen conference to be packed, but this one is very small; and Claire is immediately impressed by the handsome visage and rude manners of James Beaufort, who is clearly the Mr. Darcy in this scenario.  Despite the fact that Claire has a boyfriend--although it's nothing serious, as she assures another conference attendee--she and James start dating.

Claire also starts making friends, including the dotty Harriet, who claims to have Austen's undiscovered original draft of First Impressions tucked away in her cottage.  As Claire reads the manuscript and becomes more involved with Harriet, she discovers secret societies, liars and con-men, and that she has more in common with Austen than she thought she did.

This book, as I mentioned, is charming, mainly because it's simply so fantastical.  It feels a little old-fashioned, like one of those Mary Stewart novels where the unsuspecting heroine gets into lots of trouble, but that only added to my enjoyment of it.  The questions in the story are what keep me reading:  What will Claire discover in the First Impressions manuscript?  What is James up to?  Will she return to her boyfriend, Neil?

Unfortunately, the answers to those questions weren't satisfying at all for me, and I hated the ending.  I would have preferred it if Claire had struck out on her own instead of returning to Kansas City with one of the two men who were vying for her heart.  Neither of them were winners--James was a cad, and Neil's only attractions as far as I could tell were muscly arms and his willingness to tile a bathroom.  I mean, really!  Let's have some standards here, Claire.  Furthermore, I felt like the author was deliberately manipulating that situation to defy the readers' expectations (read: wants), which is something that has always annoyed me.

So although the majority of the book was very good, the conclusion really brought it down for me and settled it at just an okay.  I would still recommend it, though.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Persuasion by Jane Austen

Find this book at an independent bookstore near you (via IndieBound).

I just had to include the actual cover of my copy of this book, because it is u-g-l-y.  Captain Wentworth looks like Ahab.  And the Armageddon-ishly orange sky and off-kilter horizon don't help matters.

Anyway, this IS a review, not just a post where I make fun of book covers.  Persuasion is a novel by Jane Austen, wherein Anne Elliot, who has DOORMAT stamped on her forehead, is in love with Captain Federick Wentworth.  But, when he proposed seven years ago, she was persuaded by her family and friends to refuse him.  Instead of trying his own brand of persuasion on her or the people who influenced her, Capt. Wentworth stomped off in a huff and made tons of money stealing other people's ships and cargo.  Now he's back in town, which means he and Anne pretend to ignore one another for the entire book until the very end.

My main problem with this novel was Capt. Wentworth.  I really didn't like him, and I don't buy him and Anne as a romantic couple.  Let's take a closer look at some of Wentworth's actions, shall we?

• He remains pissed off at Anne for dumping him seven years after the fact.  Hold a grudge much, dude?  There's a quality you want in a mate.
• When he first sees Anne again, he tells Louisa and Henrietta she's so changed he wouldn't have recognized her.  Wow.  Somebody better start getting ready to grovel until it hurts so good.
• There's a scene where Wentworth volunteers Anne to ride in a carriage on a walk back from some person's house.  Anne takes this as consideration on Wentworth's part--but is it?  What if he was just trying to get her out of the way so he could schmooze with Louisa some more without his ex-luvah looking on?  Hmmmmmm?
• After he puts Louisa into a coma, he volunteers Anne for nurse duties: "Anne will stay, no one so proper, so capable as Anne!"  Oh, yes, Anne will do it!  Anne will sleep on the floor taking care of someone!  Anne likes to do things!  Jackass.  (Sub-point to this point: he likes to talk with exclamation marks.)
• And speaking of Louisa--he practically throws himself at a teenage (I'm guessing she's a teenager) girl without thinking it through?  What did he think would happen, that no one would assume they were engaged or whatever?  That's not just lack of judgement, that's a complete lack of consideration for other people's feelings.
  
• He only becomes re-interested in Anne after he hears/notices other men are interested in her.  Then suddenly she becomes acceptable wife material.
• The letter--that was just strange.  I would have thought Capt. Wentworth would have had the balls to say those things in person instead of writing a letter.  Isn't that the 19th-century version of texting?

As for Anne, I'm of two minds with her--a part of me really, really liked her.  I think she's an absolutely wonderful person.  And while I did mention she's a doormat (she is), that doesn't mean I think she's a weak character; quite the opposite, actually.  If I had to live in her house with her father and sister, I'd either kill myself or go completely mad, so I admire her fortitude in that respect.  But at the same time, Anne is almost exactly like Jane Bennet from Pride & Prejudice, in that she's way too nice and too forgiving; except Anne hasn't got a Lizzie around to point out when people might be taking advantage of her, or to get her to stand up for herself before the world rolls over her like a giant bulldozer.  There were times during this book that I found myself saying, "JESUS CHRIST, ANNE!" and wanting to shake her.  So what I really wanted from this novel was for Anne to assert herself just once.  To say something like, "If you think I'm so pretty, why did you tell Louisa and Henrietta you never would have recognized me, you giant cocksucker?"  But she never does--she never calls Wentworth (or anyone else) out on his behavior, toward her or even anyone else; and strangely, she never allows herself to feel anything.  As soon as she gets excited, or hopeful, or sad or angry, she tries to "calm herself" until the feelings pass.  I can only guess this is because if she did, the floodgats would open and she'd go bat-shit insane like the rest of us; but I would have liked to have seen that moment: the moment Anne Elliot reaches the end of her rope.  Because you know it's coming.  OH YOU KNOW IT.

My point is, the status quo was maintained throughout this novel--when it started, Anne was in love with Capt. Wentworth, and at the end she's in love with Capt. Wentworth.  No change.  And because I liked Anne so much, I wanted someone equally as awesome for her to fall in love with.  Unfortunately, that person does not exist in this book.  I think it's pretty safe to say Anne will continue being a doormat and Wentworth will continue doing whatever the hell he does, without much regard to her desires, which he never inquired after.  But to be fair she wouldn't tell him what they were even if he did ask.

Does it deserve to be called a classic?

You might think because of that itsy-bitsy rant I just went into that I didn't like this book.  Au contraire, my little cabbages!  I actually think this is quite a well-executed work of art--and I don't often call novels that.  But here the term is very apt.  The way Austen starts off the book, almost hiding Anne, and then bringing her slowly to the forefront of the story and revealing her relationship with Wentworth, was masterfully done.  This book isn't an easy read, but it does completely pull you in, and you have to keep reading.  Which is amazing because, really, not that much happens as far as plot goes--it's almost entirely character-driven.

This isn't a story about a romance.  It's about how we all make compromises for the sake of the people we love.  That is the nature of relationships, especially with family.  And allowing oneself to be convinced to act against one's nature or desires isn't necessarily a bad thing.

But at the same time, the book is about how people let themselves be dissuaded from going after the things they want by fear.  This is especially true in Anne and Wenworth's case--Wentworth convinces himself that he can love Louisa because he's afraid Anne doesn't like him anymore.  Austen shows that what drives people's action is rarely what they want or don't want to do, but the influence of their friends and family, and their own insecurities.

This is why Austen is still so relevant and popular (and I'm sure I'm not the first one to say this, but it bears repeating):  she's such a keen observer of human nature that it's still very easy to sympathize with her characters, and probably always will be.

"Zombified" Adaptation Suggestion:

Devil's Persuasion

Sir Walter Elliot is really a demon, using the mirrors in his bedroom to travel to and from Hell.  His daughters, half-demon spawn, have succeeded in spreading discontent and misery throughout the county--all except for Anne, who has resisted the influence of her demon side for many years.  But will the demon remain quiet when Capt. Wentworth returns to Somersetshire?  Or will it emerge to wreak vengence on Anne's innocent cousins and anyone else who dares mess with her man??

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Divine Jane

I saw an online exhibit about Jane Austen (c/o Smart Bitches) the other day that is a companion to a real-life exibit in The Morgan Library & Museum in New York. What caught my attention was the short documentary, The Divine Jane: Reflections on Austen. It's basically a gathering of a bunch of famous people who love Jane Austen and tell us all why, and there's one thing I noticed right from the beginning:

This documentary starts off with two quotes and two interviews. What do all of the four people in the opening of this film have in common? They are all men. And the third person interviewed, a woman, describes Austen's work right off the bat as, "masculine... not dainty."

What?!? Woman, are you listening to yourself? What in the world does masculine writing even look like, pray tell? And why is it better than "womanly" writing? Here's a clue: Austen wrote books about women and the issues women cared about, for a largely female audience. Afterall, she was a woman, though some people in this documentary seem to be doing their damnedest to forget that fact. And I believe it was the same woman who called Austen, "small minded"--as in confined (does that equate to what Tennyson referred to as "her small sphere," one wonders?).

I'm not saying men can't enjoy Austen--of course not. And also, Cornell West is as cute as a button. However, the purpose of this mini-documentary seems to be to legitimize Austen as a major figure in literature (uh, duh) by subtly shoving aside the fact that her novels are essentially about finding love and security, and talking instead about how her books are a study of human nature. And some stuff from the Irish novelist about how he'd rather take an Austen book to bed than a real woman (kinky!).

Quite frankly, I don't think the filmmakers did Austen any favors with documentary. And in light of the PW Top Ten List debacle a few weeks ago, I think it's clear that women authors are still valued below men just because of their gender--even when that writer is someone incomparable like Jane Austen. She needs the approval of male writers and critics, and a masculine voice to legitimize her as a great novelist--never mind that probably more people have read her work than that of either Tennyson or Beckett. Oh, but then those are just romance novels.

I'm counting this toward the Everything Austen Challenge. Because I can. Two down, four more to go!

Powered by ScribeFire.

Book Zombie Quiz

Another reading meme from The Book Zombie:

1. What author do you own the most books by?
Well, I'm not going to count them.  But off the top of my head I'd say Christina Dodd and Lisa Kleypas, since I tend to read them obsessively and they've both written a lot of books.

2. What book do you own the most copies of?
I own three copies of Treasure Island.  Why, you ask?  I really have no idea.  I like the book, but I don't like it that much.  I also own 3 versions of the story on DVD.

3. Did it bother you that both those questions ended with prepositions?
The first one didn't bother me, but the second one really did.  That might be because I've just spent the last 5 hours grading essays, though.

4. What fictional character are you secretly in love with?
Haha, I have to pick one?  Hmm, Mr. Darcy is probably number one in my heart.  But there are really so many choices....

5. What book have you read the most times in your life?
Wellllll, I don't know.  It comes down to The Ivy Tree by Mary Stewart, Here Comes the Sun by Emilie Loring, and The Vampire Diaries by LJ Smith.  The one that I've read the most of all of those is probably Here Comes the Sun, since I've read it at least once a year since I was 7.  That book is crazy, y'all (not really).

6. What was your favorite book when you were ten years old?
I loved this book called The Ghost Wore Grey by Bruce Coville when I was younger (I've always had a thing for stories involving the supernatural).  It was about a ghost from the Civil War who recruits two pre-teen girls to help him do... something.  It had this great line in it:  "What a hunk!  Too bad he's dead."

7. What is the worst book you've read in the past year?
There are so many to choose from.  Probably Dark Thirst by Sara Reinke.  That was book was terrible.

8. What is the best book you've read in the past year?
Year as in since January?  Perfect Chemistry by Simone Elkeles has probably been my personal favorite so far.

9. If you could force everyone you tagged to read one book, what would it be?
Lord, I don't know.  In all honesty, I'd probably make them read Giorgio de Chirico's Hebdomeros, because I'm evil like that, and because I could use it to create my de Chirico zombie army.  Alternative reading assignment would Nadja by André Breton.

10. Who deserves to win the next Nobel Prize for literature?
When I start reading "literature," I'll let you know.

11. What book would you most like to see made into a movie?
Well, I'm reading Drood right now, and I think it would make a great movie!  But you never know with that.  I used to really wish The Vampire Diaries would be made into a TV show (head writer would be Joss Whedon, natch), and now they ARE making it into a TV series, and I'm completely convinced they're going to fuck it up.  I heard the other day that they're changing Stephen and Damon's last names from Salvatore to Witcombe, or something really dumb like that.  WTH?  Stephen and Damon are from Italy, why would you mess with that (very important, trust me) part of the plot unless you're a total d-bag?!?!  Anywayyyy, /rant.  People are trampling on my childhood memories yet again. *grumble grumble*

12. What book would you least like to see made into a movie?
Ha, just about any romance novel.  I really don't want to see most of that stuff on-screen.

13. Describe your weirdest dream involving a writer, book, or literary character.
No idea.  I can't remember stuff like that (at least, nothing's springing to mind at the moment), although I have dreamed about Giorgio de Chirico, who is technically a writer.

14. What is the most lowbrow book you've read as an adult?
Um, just about every book I pick up is considered "lowbrow" by some person.

15. What is the most difficult book you've ever read?
Difficult how?  I'd have to say trying to read Les Fleurs du Mal by Charles Baudelaire in the original French was pretty damn difficult.  I'm amazed I survived that semester, in all honesty.

16. Do you prefer the French or the Russians?
I've never read anything by a Russian author, so I guess the French win by default.  Yay for them.

17. Roth or Updike?
I'd rather gouge my eyes out than read Updike again.  As for Roth, I honestly have no idea who that is, unless you're talking about the lead singer for Van Halen.

18. David Sedaris or Dave Eggers?
I've heard of David Sedaris.  I think I might have read one of his books.  So I'm going to vote... Sedaris.

19. Shakespeare, Milton, or Chaucer?
Shakespeare FTW.

20. Austen or Eliot?
Austen, duh.

21. What is the biggest or most embarrassing gap in your reading?
I still have not read Tolkien.  And I have to admit I haven't read the entire Austen catalog, either.  I know; I feel bad about it.

22. What is your favorite novel?
Jane Eyre is my favorite novel of all time.

23. Play?
A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen--that play is amazingly good, full of drama and yet very insightful about gender roles and the way the sexes interact.  And the female lead has a great last scene.

24. Short story?
Don't have one.

25. Epic Poem?
Oh, yes, what is my favorite epic poem???  Well, I would say Childe Harold's Pilgrimage by Byron, but I never actually finished it.  Or The Odyssey, except I never actually read it, just watched the miniseries.  Or The Epic of Gilgamesh, except I have also not read that.  So I suppose one can conclude from this that I don't read epic poems.

26. Short(er) poem?

Strephon kissed me in the spring,

     Robin in the fall,

But Colin only looked at me

     And never kissed at all.

Strephon's kiss was lost in jest,

     Robin's lost in play,

But the kiss in Colin's eyes

     Haunts me night and day.

--Sara Teasdale, "The Look"

27. Work of non-fiction?
Hmm, I only read non-fiction for work.  I don't really have a favorite, since I don't read it for enjoyment.

28. Who is your favorite writer?
I really couldn't say.  I hate just about anyone's writing if I'm not in the mood for it.  LOL  Probably LJ Smith if I had to pick one writer.

29. Who is the most overrated writer alive today?
This question is funny to me, because I don't think there are many contemporary writers who are "rated" (by whom?) at the same level as Charles Dickens was in his lifetime--just to use an example.  I think Nora Roberts is really overrated, if you want to know the truth.  I have never seen the appeal of her books.

30. What is your desert island book?
Taking just one book to a desert island would be a torturous decision.  No matter what it was, I would get really tired of it.  I guess I'd pick Robinson Crusoe, because if you're ever going to connect with a guy who's stranded on a deserted island, it'd be then, amirite?

31. And ... what are you reading right now?
Drood by Dan Simmons

Powered by ScribeFire.